Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 156849 (ALL)

MOHD. SALEEM v. UNION OF INDIA THRU. MINIST. OF FINANCE DEPTT. OF REVENUE NEW DELHI AND ANOTHER

A482/6461/2025 · 2025-08-08

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46279 Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6461 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Saleem Opposite Party :- Union Of India Thru. Minist. Of Finance Deptt. Of Revenue New Delhi And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Zia Ul Qayuim,Ajeet Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.S.G.I.,Digvijay Nath Dubey Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for the D.R.I. and perused the record. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set aside the impugned Non Bailable Warrants which was firstly ordered to be issued on 04.03.2023 in Complaint Case No.: 2357/2017, titled Union of India versus Mohd. Saleem, under Section: 135(1)(a) & 135(1)(b) of Customs Act, 1962 Police Station: D.R.I. District: Lucknow and subsisting till previous order dated 25.07.2025 which is pending in the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow on the ground that the nature and manner in which the impugned orders have been passed are patently illegal and arbitrary as well as inconsistent with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami vs State of Uttaranchal (2007) 12 SCC 1, Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs State of Maharashtra (2012) 9 SCC 791, Sharif Ahmed vs State of U.P. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 726 as well as by this Hon'ble Court in Purushottam Chaudhary vs Central Bureau of Investigation in A-482 No-1974 of 2023. Further, the applicant may kindly be permitted to appear before the learned trial court on or before the next dated fixed i.e. 02.09.2025 in light of the judgement delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau of Investigation (2022) 10 SCC 51." After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicant to file bail application before the trial court, which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351: (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant, therefore, the benefit as provided by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttranchal and others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1, Sunil Tyagi vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and another reported in 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3597 may also be extended to the applicant. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra) as also in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttranchal and others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1, Sunil Tyagi vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and another reported in 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3597 and the statement of counsel for the applicant that the applicant would appear before the court concerned within 30 days, this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer/Court concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant applies for bail including the application for recall of non-bailable warrant and/or seeking bail which shall be considered and decided by the trial court expeditiously strictly in accordance with law, he would not take any coercive action against the applicant in the aforesaid case. In case, the applicant does not appear in terms of this order, coercive action shall be taken against him. The present appeal is disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 8.8.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench